Chitika actually Shitika
I was wondering why I wasn’t laughing when I read this. It might be because I’m not suprised.
Have you been hearing lots of hype about Chitika mini-malls on various webmaster message boards and blogs? Over the past month or so it seems like there was a bombardment of news stories about this contextual affiliate ad program.
It turns out that now website owners are getting a very early, and nasty, Christmas present of a so called “audit.” A suprise to the tune of “earnings” being slashed by between 50% and 90%.
This isn’t new. There is a history of countless of adult affiliate programs popping up over night, offering their affiliates great “earnings”, and then dissapearing the next month. Thats why I wait to hear others results before jumping on the newest bandwagon in town. Do yourself a favor and do the same.
A few years back when I was involved in the adult world I was screwed by fly-by-nighters. It was not uncommon, out of the 100’s of adult programs out there I only trusted a few. Do you read showmoneys blog? He has some interesting things to say about chitikas website and blog.
Comment by Damien — December 3, 2005 @ 2:44 am
No I don’t, do you have a url?
Comment by Andrew — December 3, 2005 @ 11:40 am
actually I think you’ll find that your statement ‘A suprise to the tune of “earnings” being slashed by between 50% and 90%.’ might be a slight exageration. While there are some publishers who were in this range there are also just as many that seem to be saying they were audited in the 3% to 50% over at my blog in the comments of this post. In fact one guy said his audit took his figures UP 4%
My own audit was 13%.
While there are surely some problems for Chitika it’s those who are hardest done by that are making the most noise (understandably really) and in the process some of the reporting of the story is a little one sided.
Hope you don’t mind me adding a bit of balance to it.
Comment by Darren — December 4, 2005 @ 8:04 am
Well, all of the people I’ve seen who said their adjustment was in the 5% or so range were low earners — like $10.
Comment by Andrew — December 4, 2005 @ 11:31 am